Conquering Manticore + Opponent's Rune-scarred Demon

10 posts / 0 new
Last post
So I have a Rune-scarred Demon (RSD) and my opponent 'steals' it with a Conquering Manticore. Does the RSD tutor for my opponent and then for me again when it returns to me?

I am unsure, as it is entering my opponents battlefield and then mine again so I feel it should trigger... but maybe gaining control of the creature doesn't actually change battlefields? I don't know. Very cool combo if it works :P 
Changing controllers doesn't mean it leaves and reenters the battlefield.  No tutoring, sorry.

"Go, then. There are other worlds than these." -- Stephen King, The Gunslinger

Please feel free to copy this message into your sig.

The Demon remains on the Battlefield; it only changes controller.
Its enter-the-battlefield ability does not trigger.

As Glasir said "No tutoring, sorry."   

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one thousand, people might notice;

If I steal a hundred dollar from a loot of one million, I might get away with it;

If I wish to steal even more and still go unnoticed, I need to make the loot bigger.

 

Now you know why taxes always go up.

 

Looting: ''the plundering of public assets by corrupt or greedy authorities'' (Wikipedia)

Rune-Scarred Demon
Conquering Manticore

Before I answer your question im gonna show you how to autocard so that way people are able to know what cards your asking about with out having to look them up, alrighty Smile

[c?]Island[?/c ]
take out the question marks and you get
Island

Creatures whoes controlers have changed don't reenter the battlefield, they only enter when the spell resolves or other ways such as deathrender and so on and so forth, there are multiple ways a creature can enter the battlefield however "switching sides" as it would be called isn't one
>reminder to self< Best not to argue with idiots, they will bring you down to their level and then beat you with experience
Oh dude- thanks! I have been wondering how people do that lol.

Ok. thanks for the help everyone.

Why would a creature get summoning sickness then if it is not reentering the battlefield but switching controller?
A creature has "summoning sickness" if you have not controlled it since the beginning of your most recent turn. It is admittedly a bad term used to describe this rule, as summoning it is not the only way for creatures to be "sick".
MTG Rules Advisor Autocarding helps a lot -> [c]Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas[/c] = Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas "But keep in mind when the internet dies with the electrical system in 2012, you can still play paper magic, while digital cards will have gone the way of the dodo. In the post apocalyptic world, magic cards will be our currency!" - Samot, explaining to someone the ramifications of switching to MTGO!
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both selfish and rational. I'm scheming, secretive and manipulative; I use knowledge as a tool for personal gain, and in turn obtaining more knowledge. At best, I am mysterious and stealthy; at worst, I am distrustful and opportunistic.
Why would a creature get summoning sickness then if it is not reentering the battlefield but switching controller?



Because summoning sickness cares about for as long the player has controled that creature,  not necessarily about when it entered the battlefield. Control change causes summoning sickness.

[<o>]
perfect. Thanks for the clarification all. Much appreciated.
Rune-Scarred Demon
Conquering Manticore

Before I answer your question im gonna show you how to autocard so that way people are able to know what cards your asking about with out having to look them up, alrighty 

[c?]Island[?/c ]
take out the question marks and you get
Island

Creatures whoes controlers have changed don't reenter the battlefield, they only enter when the spell resolves or other ways such as deathrender and so on and so forth, there are multiple ways a creature can enter the battlefield however "switching sides" as it would be called isn't one


You don't need to put extraneous characters in your tag examples. For example, to say:

[c]Island[/c] -> Island, you can just do this: [c[b][/b]]Island[/c] -> [c]Island[/c]

Opening and closing an inner tag in the middle of an outer tag like this will prevent the outer tag from working.
All Generalizations are Bad
You don't need to put extraneous characters in your tag examples. For example, to say:

[c]Island[/c] -> Island, you can just do this: [c[b][/b]]Island[/c] -> [c]Island[/c]

Opening and closing an inner tag in the middle of an outer tag like this will prevent the outer tag from working.


but then people just copy and paste your [c]Island[/c] and don't understand why it won't link Island :P
Cannot be relied upon^